Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 2775 (MAD)

S. Sundaram v. K. Srinivasan

2012-07-03

G.RAJASURIA

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Animadverting upon the order dated 10.1.2012 passed by the District Munsif, Palacode, Dharmapuri District, in O.S.No.Nil of 2012, this civil revision petition is filed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the entertaining stage itself. 3. A thumb nail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus: (i) The revision petitioners herein filed the plaint with the following prayer: "To pass a judgment and decree: a) Declaring the sale deed dated 10.7.2006 bearing document No.839/2006 registered in the office of Sub-Registrar at Marandahalli, was obtained as security for the loan amount provided to plaintiffs by the defendant; b) Granting permanent injunction to restrain the defendant and his men from in any manner trespassing into the suit property or interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiffs into the suit property; c) Directing the defendant to pay costs of suit to the plaintiff." (extracted as such) However, the lower Court rejected the plaint itself. 4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, this revision has been focussed. 5. When this Court posed the question as to why the revision petitioners, being the signatories to the sale deed concerned, should simply ask for declaration, without asking for cancellation, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners in all fairness would say that, that would be the proper course and as per Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955, it should have been framed and before the appropriate Court it should have been filed, and Court Fees should have been paid. However, erroneously it was not done so. Even though the Munsif Court should have returned the plaint with such an endorsement, it has failed to do so. 6. I could see considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners/plaintiffs. Accordingly, the order of the lower Court in rejecting the plaint is set aside and the plaint is ordered to be returned for being presented before the Court concerned, subject to law of limitation, and also making necessary modifications and corrections in the prayer as well as in the plaint and also paying appropriate Court fee. 7. The civil revision petition is ordered accordingly. However, the is no order as to costs.